About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
the election was you know, well, you know, they elected both the president and us. today they were talking about revenue's on the table. they were talking about, well, we think we can work this out. it was a much different tone than we saw in those earlier statements that we just showed. >> right. well, i ththink they had to sho some toughness for the people in their caucus but they know what the underlying reality is. that helps explain the tone. there's just nothing like winning an election, a lot better than losing an election. you saw that, with all the republicans running away from mitt romney who tried to explain the 47% comment in these latest comments, they just ran away and said that's not us. >> you've had republican leaders out there talking about, do you really want to go to the mattresses over this issue? do you really want to lose the country because you want to fight for these really high bracket tax breaks. >> even "the wall street journal" han editorial, the editorial board at the journal seems to indicate that the gop should take a deal now. "wall street journal." let me
he ever wished us to know. jack kennedy, elusive hero is now in paperback. hope you get a chance to get it, read it, and for the first time understand. it's the kind of book you want to read at this time of year especially. we need heroes. we can give thanks that here we truly had one. that's "hardball" for now. thanks for being with us. "politics nation" with al sharpton starts right now. >>> thanks, chris. and thanks to you for tuning in. tonight's lead, the gop's romney problem. there have been some strange responses to the republicans' election loss. but none has been more cynical than that from willard mitt romney. and it has hit his party hard. romney's claim, caught on tape, that the president won the election because of gifts to minorities and young people has made a bad loss even worse for republicans. portions of the tape were posted online, though msnbc doesn't know exactly when the call took place. >> what the president -- president's campaign did was focus on certain members of his base coalition, give them extraordinary financial gifts from the government, and then
, ding, ding, higher tack rates for the top 2%. but don't pay any attention to that. republicans want us to know that what's really important is that they are rejecting the norquist pledge. >> the lot that has been said about this pledge and i will tell you, when i go to the constituents that re-elected me, it is not about that pledge. it really is about trying to solve problems. and so if right now the question is, how do you do that? well, john boehner went to the white house ten days ago and said republicans in the house are willing to put revenues on the table. that was a big move, right? >> a big move? huh? the gop has always been open to raising revenue. governor romney even promised to do that. it seems awfully similar to what speaker boehner offered a year ago during debt talks. >> we have an agreement on a revenue number. there was an agreement on some additional revenues. >> i stuck my neck out a mile and i put revenues on the table. >> revenues on the table? the gop is essentially offering the same thing they did a year ago. plus, they want to keep tack rates for the wealthy t
are sick of this crap. they want us to concentrate on real things. >> now, wouldn't it be a logical question since it has been stated and confirmed, as you just said, governor, that eric cantor was told about this petraeus situation. wouldn't it be logical to ask did mr. cantor call the white house and say, "what are you going to do about this, are you aware of this"? why are they pointing at everybody except the one congressman we know knew something, their fellow colleague mr. cantor. >> the republican head of the house intelligence committee, congressman rogers, he didn't know. he should have words with eric cantor. why didn't eric cantor tell the republican head of the intelligence committee in the house. >> i served on the intelligence committee for nofour years in congress. this is what gets my irish up. there was a knucklehead who did this video that dishonored the prophet mohamed. >> right. >> there were protests all over the world in egypt, libya, tripoli and may or may not happen 400 miles away in benghazi regardless. but that's what susan rice was saying. there were prote
of congress what a a $2,000 tax hike would mean to you. write them a comment, tweet it using m2k. not y2k. we figured that would make it easier to remember. >> you have the president mobilizing the citizens to put pressure on the congress, ana marie. >> this is actually something pretty familiar to people who have been watching the white house for any number of election cycles. going back to, at least in my memory when i started in 200, you are trying to mobilize your apparatus. this is the time to do it, if you're going to do it. and you have obama supporters willing to retweet anything that the president says. i do hope that they can use this at this point. i'm not optimistic that this is something that can continue. people aren't going to remain as engaged. i do think that's probably what is going to happen, if anything. of course, it's still from a perspective hard to understand. it's only intel jabl if you buy into the weird social and political calculus that is the congress. >> but if he waits until january 3rd -- >> right. >> -- we will be over the so-called fiscal cliff, joy. >> right
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)